Equivalent value attachment under money laundering law upheld where received funds were treated as proceeds of crime and prior-acquired property could...
Section 179 proceedings against directors require both a reasonable opportunity to reply and foundational allegations in the notice itself. The text explains that where the notice allowed only about two days to respond, the proceedings failed for breach of natural justice and the resulting order and demand were quashed. It also states that if the company is asserted to be a public limited company, the notice must set out facts showing why it should nevertheless be treated as closely held or why the corporate veil should be lifted, including any allegation of an oblique motive to defraud the revenue. Fresh notice and reconsideration were permitted.
Section 179 proceedings against directors require both a reasonable opportunity to reply and foundational allegations in the notice itself. The text explains that where the notice allowed only about two days to respond, the proceedings failed for breach of natural justice and the resulting order and demand were quashed. It also states that if the company is asserted to be a public limited company, the notice must set out facts showing why it should nevertheless be treated as closely held or why the corporate veil should be lifted, including any allegation of an oblique motive to defraud the revenue. Fresh notice and reconsideration were permitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
